DOCSLIB.ORG

Outreach Summary P a G E | 1 August 2020 REFERENCE B

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Outreach Summary P a G E | 1 August 2020 REFERENCE B REFERENCE B Outreach #1 Summary Table of Contents Introduction..................................................................................................................................................1 Listening Sessions ........................................................................................................................................2 Online Survey................................................................................................................................................2 Key Findings..................................................................................................................................................3 Survey Questions and Summary ..................................................................................................................3 Demographics.............................................................................................................................................29 Appendix A..................................................................................................................................................39 Appendix B................................................................................................................................................136 Appendix C................................................................................................................................................139 Introduction The following report provides an overview of the results of the listening sessions and online survey results for Clackamas County’s Transit Development Plan. Due to COVID-19 restrictions, tabling sessions did not take place during the public outreach period, however three virtual listening sessions were conducted. The online survey was open between June 3, 2020 and July 2, 2020 to give the public an opportunity to share their thoughts on Clackamas County’s transit services and existing gaps. A total of 720 people took the survey, including 440 riders and 280 non-riders. There were 29 questions, 8 of which were demographics questions. Three listening session dates/times were advertised on the website and promoted in outreach emails to the stakeholder interest groups listed below. Two of the scheduled listening sessions were conducted and the third was cancelled due to a lack of registrants. However, a one-on- one stakeholder interview was conducted instead. A total of 6 people RSVPed for the 3 listening sessions and 3 people actually attended. • Local jurisdictions • Business organizations, associations and chambers of commerce • Community Planning Organizations (CPOs), Hamlets and neighborhood associations • Bike, pedestrian and transit boards • Transit interests • Environmental interests • Senior services Clackamas County Transit Development Plan – Outreach Summary P a g e | 1 August 2020 REFERENCE B • Groups that represent Spanish speakers • Low-income residents and advocacy organizations • Health equity interests • Schools and colleges • Tourism interests • Housing and community development interests LISTENING SESSIONS Three 30-minute listening sessions took place via Zoom meetings on the following dates: • Wednesday, June 17 – Participant: Bill Merchant, Hamlet of Beavercreek • Thursday, June 25 – Participant: Jamie Huff, City of Happy Valley • Tuesday, July 7 – Participant: Tom Strader, SCTD District Manager See Appendix B for complete listening session notes. ONLINE SURVEY Promotion A $20 grocery store gift card incentive was offered to participants who recorded their names and contact information in Question 1 of the survey; four randomly-selected participants won the drawings and were mailed a gift card. Clackamas County promoted the online survey through the following media: • NextDoor postings • Clackamas County Facebook and Twitter postings • Local jurisdictions social media • Emails to the stakeholder interest groups (listed above), interested parties and TAC and PAC members Key Findings • Within the past year, 54% of all respondents used TriMet, 40% used no transit service, and small percentages of respondents used the smaller service providers. • Prior to the survey, nearly all of the non-riders had heard of TriMet and about 30% of the respondents had heard of Canby Area Transit (CAT), Sandy Area Metro (SAM), South Metro Area Regional Transit (SMART), and Mt Hood Express. Fewer people had heard of South Clackamas Transit District (SCTD) and the CCC Xpress Shuttle. Clackamas County Transit Development Plan – Outreach Summary P a g e | 2 August 2020 REFERENCE B • About 60% of non-riders prefer to drive and 39% stated that transit doesn’t go where they need it to go. Twelve of the non-riders do not support transit in general and do not want to pay tax dollars for it (Question 34 opened- ended responses.) • 14 write-in comments in response to why people don’t use transit noted safety concerns as a primary reason people do not ride transit, and in subsequent open-ended questions, safety concerns were a prominent theme. • 9 non-riders said that their disability makes traveling via transit more difficult. • 129 non-riders (near 50% of non-riders) use Uber/Lyft or a taxi service to get around. • Of the riders, about 90% use MAX/light-rail, whereas 62% ride a bus with a fixed route. Only 10 people use TriMet lift or a similar door-to-door service. • The primary destination for participants was for recreational/social purposes but high numbers of people also commute to work and shopping destinations via transit. • The most common specific place that people would like to travel to by transit if it were available was West Linn (Question 10). • 50% of participants travel directly to their destinations and do not transfer. • Fewer riders transfer between different service providers, but 74% transfer between TriMet lines. • Responses by non-riders to where specifically they would like to travel if it was available, listed by cross streets, yielded: Salamo Drive, Stafford Road, Beavercreek Road, Borland Road, Sunnyside Road, Lower Boones Ferry Road, and Highway 43 from L.O. to Portland. (Question 15) • The desire for MAX to run to Oregon City came up in several different open-ended comments for various questions. Survey Questions and Summary The following is a chronological listing and summary of each survey question. None of the questions were required, so various numbers of participants skipped each one. All of the multiple-choice questions permitted multiple responses per question, so the percentages listed do not necessarily add up to 100%. See Appendix A for all open-ended comments for each question. Question 1 Question 1 asked participants to provide their contact information for the incentives. Clackamas County Transit Development Plan – Outreach Summary P a g e | 3 August 2020 REFERENCE B Question 2 Please select all bus or MAX/light-rail companies that you have used to ride a bus or MAX/light-rail train in Clackamas County in the last 12 months. Of the 705 people who answered this question, 54% have used TriMet over the past 12 months, approximately 40% have not used any transit providers and less than 5% have used one of the smaller transit districts. Thirty people selected “Other” and provided the following other forms of transportation they use. • Uber/Lyft • WES train • Amtrak • Gorge Express • School bus Which Service Providers People Have Used Within the Past Year Trimet 54.00% Canby Area Transit (CAT) 2.60% Sandy Area Metro (SAM) 3.40% South Metro Area Regional Transit (SMART) 4.70% South Clackamas Transportation District (SCTD) 2.00% Mt Hood Express 3.70% Clackamas Community College Xpress Shuttle 2.00% Other (Transportation Reaching People),… 3.00% Don't know 0.70% None 39.70% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% Clackamas County Transit Development Plan – Outreach Summary P a g e | 4 August 2020 REFERENCE B Non-Rider Questions The following 4 questions were intended only for those who indicated in the previous question that they had not used any bus or MAX/light rail in the last 12 months. Question 3 Before this survey, which transit providers were you aware of? Of the 283 participants who responded, nearly everyone (98%) had heard of TriMet prior to the survey. About 30% were familiar with CAT, SAM, SMART, and Mt Hood Express or the Other options. In the “Other” comments, nine people shared other service providers that they had heard of, including Cherriots and WES. Which Transit Providers People Were Aware Of Prior to the Survey TriMet 97.50% Canby Area Transit (CAT) 34.30% Sandy Area Metro (SAM) 29.00% South Clackamas Transportation District (SCTD) 12.40% Mt Hood Express 29.30% Clackamas Community College Xpress Shuttle 22.30% Other (Transportation Reaching People,… 33.20% Don't know 1.10% None 1.40% 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00%100.00%120.00% Clackamas County Transit Development Plan – Outreach Summary P a g e | 5 August 2020 REFERENCE B Question 4 If you don’t ride transit, why don’t you use transit in Clackamas County? The majority of the 272 non-rider respondents who answered this question said that they preferred to drive (61%) and 39% stated that transit doesn’t take them where they need to go. There were 53 comments provided, and the most common themes were: • Poor Access (18) • Safety concerns (14) o Of those who had safety concerns and completed the demographics survey information, four were aged 35-44, two were aged 45-54, three were aged 55-64, two were 65 years plus; they were all White, saved one Mixed race person; and the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Existing Framework Memo Draft 11
    To: Gorge Transit Strategy Working Group Date: November 15, 2020 From: Kathy Fitzpatrick, Mobility Manager Subject: Gorge Regional Transit Strategy: Existing Framework Memo Gorge Regional Transit Strategy: Background The purpose of the Gorge Regional Transit Strategy phase 1 is to combine the goals, policies, and prioritizations of local transportation planning efforts in the Columbia Gorge to establish a foundation for a regional strategy and vision for public transportation. Phase 1 objectives include strengthening partnerships, completing local plan assessments, and synthesizing goals and policies into a high-level regional vision. Phase II of the Strategy will focus on an implementation strategy with additional data analysis, ridership forecasts, financial planning, and operational assessments. The USFS (Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area) offered assistance from the US DOT Volpe Center for the Gorge Transit Strategy. The Gorge Regional Transit Strategy Project Management Team worked with the Volpe Center Team to build on their recent transportation plan research work. Existing Framework Memo The Existing Framework Memo summarizes and synthesizes existing local, regional, statewide public transportation plans, studies, and programs to identify common or conflicting goals, policies and strategies. This will create an awareness of inconsistencies and endorsement of commonalities but does not seek to amend or revise current or adopted plans. The Existing Framework Memo includes an overview of the planning area, a summary of existing services, and summaries of the existing local, regional, and statewide public transportation plans reviewed. Strategy Area The strategy area is located within the jurisdictional boundaries of the five transportation providers whose partnership forms the Gorge TransLink Alliance. Providers include Mt Adams Transportation Service (Klickitat County), Skamania County Transit, Columbia Area Transit (Hood River County), the Link (Wasco County), and Sherman County Community Transit.
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Policy Advisory Committee On
    Date: December 1, 2020 To: Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT) and interested parties From: Carrie MacLaren, Metro Attorney Michelle Bellia, Senior Attorney Margi Bradway, Planning & Development Deputy Director CC: Councilor Shirley Craddick, JPACT Chair Subject: JPACT Member and Alternate Appointment Process Purpose To provide guidance to cities and counties in the Portland Metro area about appointments to the Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation (JPACT) based on the JPACT bylaws, written and adopted by JPACT and the Metro Council in 1990 and amended in 2008. Background Metro is the federally mandated metropolitan planning organization (MPO) designated by the governor to develop an overall transportation plan and to program federal funds. Comprised of transportation representatives from across the region, JPACT recommends priorities and develops plans for the region. Before adopting transportation policies, the Metro Council must consider JPACT’s recommendations. Federal law, MAP-21, requires that MPOs representing areas with populations over 200,000 (known as Transportation Management Areas, or TMAs) have a decision-making structure that incorporates input from local elected officials, transit agencies, and appropriate state officials. Across the country, MPO boards vary in size. Federal regulations further define the role of the “policy advisory committee” in terms provide oversight and guidance to the MPO on transportation planning and funding. Metro’s Code and the JPACT Bylaws describe the makeup
    [Show full text]
  • City of Wilsonville Transit Master Plan
    City of Wilsonville Transit Master Plan CONVENIENCE SAFETY RELIABILITY EFFICIENCY FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY FRIENDLY SERVICE EQUITY & ACCESS ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY JUNE 2017 Acknowledgements The City of Wilsonville would like to acknowledge the following for their dedication to the development of this Transit Master Plan. Their insight and outlook toward the future of this City helped create a comprehensive plan that represents the needs of employers, residents and visitors of Wilsonville. Transit Master Plan Task Force Planning Commission Julie Fitzgerald, Chair* Jerry Greenfield, Chair Kristin Akervall Eric Postma, Vice Chair Caroline Berry Al Levit Paul Diller Phyllis Millan Lynnda Hale Peter Hurley Barb Leisy Simon Springall Peter Rapley Kamran Mesbah Pat Rehberg Jean Tsokos City Staff Stephanie Yager Dwight Brashear, Transit Director Eric Loomis, Operations Manager City Council Scott Simonton, Fleet Manager Tim Knapp, Mayor Gregg Johansen, Transit Field Supervisor Scott Star, President Patrick Edwards, Transit Field Supervisor Kristin Akervall Nicole Hendrix, Transit Management Analyst Charlotte Lehan Michelle Marston, Transit Program Coordinator Susie Stevens Brad Dillingham, Transit Planning Intern Julie Fitzgerald* Chris Neamtzu, Planning Director Charlie Tso, Assistant Planner Consultants Susan Cole, Finance Director Jarrett Walker Keith Katko, Finance Operations Manager Michelle Poyourow Tami Bergeron, Planning Administration Assistant Christian L Watchie Amanda Guile-Hinman, Assistant City Attorney Ellen Teninty Stephan Lashbrook,
    [Show full text]
  • Canby Transit Choices Report DECEMBER 14, 2016
    Canby Transit Choices Report DECEMBER 14, 2016 For Canby Area Transit Table of Contents Summary . 4 Productivity . 28 Introduction Current Costs and Revenues . 29 The Variety of Transit Services in Canby . 6 Near Future . 30 Fixed-Route Transit . 6 Highway 99 corridor study . 30 Demand Responsive Transit . 8 Federal transit funding . 30 What causes transit ridership? . 10 Increasing hourly costs . 30 Transit’s conflicting goals . 12 Existing Ridership and Performance Choices for Canby . 13 Route 99 . 32 Market and Needs Assessment Dial-a-ride and ADA paratransit . 33 Density of Residents and Jobs . .15 . Operations Contract . 38 Low-Income Residents . .15 . Service Standards . 38 Younger and Older Residents . 15. Language . 39 Residents by Race/Ethnicity . 15 . Weekends . 39 Commuting Patterns . 23 Complexity . .41 History and Trends Future Alternatives Recent History . 25 Focus on Key Choices . 43 Amount of service provided . 26 Dial-a-ride and ADA Paratransit Efficiency . 43 Ridership . 27 Alternative 1: Local Fixed Route . 45 JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Table of Contents Local circulator . 45 Dial-a-ride and ADA paratransit . 46 Route 99 . 46 Alternative 2: More Route 99 Service . 47 Route 99 . 47 Dial-a-ride and ADA paratransit . 47 Weekend Service . 52 Measuring Impacts to Key Populations . 52 JARRETT WALKER + ASSOCIATES Canby’s answer to the first question were Following the release of this report, CAT Summary “Yes, we should slightly shift our invest- staff and consultants will be attending This report is the first step in the develop- ment toward fixed routes.” These two meetings, making presentations, distribut- ment of a new Transit Master Plan for the Alternatives show how much service of ing surveys, and taking input in other ways, City of Canby .
    [Show full text]
  • Service Alerts – Digital Displays
    Service Alerts – Digital Displays TriMet has digital displays at most MAX Light Rail stations to provide real-time arrival information as well as service disruption/delay messaging. Some of the displays are flat screens as shown to the right. Others are reader boards. Due to space, the messages need to be as condensed as possible. While we regularly post the same alert at stations along a line, during the Rose Quarter MAX Improvements we provided more specific alerts by geographical locations and even individual stations. This was because the service plan, while best for the majority of riders, was complex and posed communications challenges. MAX Blue Line only displays MAX Blue Line disrupted and frequency reduced. Shuttle buses running between Interstate/Rose Quarter and Lloyd Center stations. trimet.org/rq MAX Blue and Red Line displays page 1 – Beaverton Transit Center to Old Town MAX Blue/Red lines disrupted and frequency reduced. Red Line detoured. Shuttle buses running between Interstate/RQ and Lloyd Center. trimet.org/rq MAX Blue and Red Line displays page 2 – Beaverton Transit Center to Old Town Direct shuttle buses running between Kenton/N Denver Station, being served by Red Line, and PDX. trimet.org/rq MAC Red and Yellow displays – N Albina to Expo Center Red, Yellow lines serving stations btwn Interstate/RQ and Expo Center. trimet.org/rq. Connect with PDX shuttle buses at Kenton. MAX Red display – Parkrose Red Line disrupted, this segment running btwn Gateway and PDX. Use Blue/Green btwn Lloyd Center and Gateway, shuttles btwn Interstate/RQ and Lloyd Center.
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Central Building Anchor Full Block Between Se 8Th & 9Th / Se Morrison & Belmont 808 Se Morrison Street | Portland | Oregon | 97214
    GRAND CENTRAL BUILDING ANCHOR FULL BLOCK BETWEEN SE 8TH & 9TH / SE MORRISON & BELMONT 808 SE MORRISON STREET | PORTLAND | OREGON | 97214 APPROXIMATELY 20,617 SQUARE FOOT ANCHOR SPACE WITH OFF-STREET PARKING AVAILABLE ANCHOR SIGNAGE OPPORTUNITY PRIME LOCATION IN THE CENTRAL EASTSIDE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT ANCHOR SIGNAGE OPPORTUNITY SE MORRISON STREET Looking East From SE 7th & Morrison CENTRAL EASTSIDE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT | SE 8TH & MORRISON / SE 9TH & BELMONT THE GRAND CENTRAL BUILDING Building Overview | A Contributing Historic Property to Portland’s Fruitpacking District The Grand Central Building is a Spanish Colonial Revival building originally constructed in 1929 as a public market in Portland’s fruitpacking district and featured 23 separate vendors. Available Space | Anchor Space Total: Approximately 20,617 Square Feet First Floor: 15,617 Square Feet Mezzanine: 5,000 Square Feet Parking | The Grand Central Building features an underground parking garage with 76 parking spaces as well as a surface lot on the west side of the building with 28 additional parking spaces. Building Co-Tenants | West Face of Building Area Retailers | Building Location | Located between SE Morrison & Belmont Streets, SE 8th & 9th Avenues The Central Eastside Industrial District (CEID), the area bound by Interstate 84 to the North, the Willamette River to the west, Powell Blvd / Hwy 26 to the south, and NE/SE 12th Avenue to the east, was once the fruitpacking center of Portland. Located immediately east across the Burnside, Morrison, and Hawthorne Bridges from Downtown Portland, the CEID provides a convenient - and often more spacious - alternative to the CBD for office users and retailers looking to locate in the Central City.
    [Show full text]
  • Trimet SE Service Enhancement Plan
    Presentation to the Clackamas County Board of County Commissioners September 22, 2015 Schedule Westside: Completed in 2014 Southwest: Completed in 2015 Eastside: Completion in 2016 Southeast: Completion in 2016 North/Central: Completion in 2016 Annual Service Plan Optimize & Maintain Restore Increase Capacity & Restore Frequent Increase spans & Reliability Service Levels frequencies Schedule & detail Add new lines tweaks Optimize routes & schedules Reconfigure lines Hillsboro Beaverton Gresham Portland Forest Grove/ Cornelius Tigard Happy Milwaukie King Valley City Lake Oswego Tualatin Legend Sherwood West Job center Linn Oregon City Downtown trips Hillsboro Beaverton Gresham Portland Forest Grove/ Cornelius Tigard Happy Milwaukie King Valley City Lake Oswego Tualatin Legend Sherwood West Job center Linn Oregon City Downtown trips Hillsboro Beaverton Gresham Portland Forest Grove/ Cornelius Tigard Happy Milwaukie King Valley City Lake Oswego Legend Tualatin Sherwood West Job center Linn Oregon City Downtown trips Outreach efforts: More service to Sunnyside Rd. Clackamas Industrial Area OC to Tualatin service Service to S. Oregon City trimet.org/southeast SOUTHEAST Help make transit better in your community Making Transit Better in Southeast Draft Vision We’ve been talking with riders What we heard from the community and community members We learned from Southeast riders and residents about the about improving bus service in challenges they face today and how the region will grow in the future. Based on this, we’re proposing more and better Southeast Portland, Estacada, bus service to help people get to jobs, education, health Gladstone, Happy Valley, care, affordable housing and essential services. Proposed Milwaukie, Oregon City and bus service improvements include route changes and extensions, new bus lines, adjusted frequency and better Clackamas County.
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit
    Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit (LRT) Performance Characteristics Stations Mixed Traffic Lanes* Service Characteristics Newest Corridor End‐to‐End Travel Departures Every 'X' Travel Speed (MPH) City Corridor Segment Open length (mi) # Spacing (mi) Miles % Time Minutes BRT Systems Boston Silver Line Washington Street ‐ SL5 2002 2.40 13 0.18 1.03 42.93% 19 7 7.58 Oakland San Pablo Rapid ‐ 72R 2003 14.79 52 0.28 14.79 100.00% 60 12 14.79 Albuquerque The Red Line (766) 2004 11.00 17 0.65 10.32 93.79% 44 18 15.00 Kansas City Main Street ‐ MAX "Orange Line" 2005 8.95 22 0.41 4.29 47.92% 40 10 13.42 Eugene Green Line 2007 3.98 10 0.40 1.59 40.00% 29 10 8.23 New York Bx12 SBS (Fordham Road ‐ Pelham Pkwy) 2008 9.00 18 0.50 5.20 57.73% 52 3 10.38 Cleveland HealthLine 2008 6.80 39 0.17 2.33 34.19% 38 8 10.74 Snohomish County Swift BRT ‐ Blue Line 2009 16.72 31 0.54 6.77 40.52% 43 12 23.33 Eugene Gateway Line 2011 7.76 14 0.55 2.59 33.33% 29 10 16.05 Kansas City Troost Avenue ‐ "Green Line" 2011 12.93 22 0.59 12.93 100.00% 50 10 15.51 New York M34 SBS (34th Street) 2011 2.00 13 0.15 2.00 100.00% 23 9 5.22 Stockton Route #44 ‐ Airport Corridor 2011 5.50 8 0.69 5.50 100.00% 23 20 14.35 Stockton Route #43 ‐ Hammer Corridor 2012 5.30 14 0.38 5.30 100.00% 28 12 11.35 Alexandria ‐ Arlington Metroway 2014 6.80 15 0.45 6.12 89.95% 24 12 17.00 Fort Collins Mason Corridor 2014 4.97 12 0.41 1.99 40.00% 24 10 12.43 San Bernardino sbX ‐ "Green Line" 2014 15.70 16 0.98 9.86 62.79% 56 10 16.82 Minneapolis A Line 2016 9.90 20 0.50 9.90 100.00% 28 10 21.21 Minneapolis Red Line 2013 13.00 5 2.60 2.00 15.38% 55 15 14.18 Chapel Hill N‐S Corridor Proposed 8.20 16 0.51 1.34 16.34% 30 7.5 16.40 LRT Systems St.
    [Show full text]
  • I. Applicant Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties
    FY19-FY21 Regional Coordination Program STIF FUNDING APPLICATION I. Applicant Clackamas, Multnomah, and Washington Counties and government operated transit providers are eligible to receive RCP funds and are therefore Grant Recipients. Other local government authorities, non-profit organizations, and private for-profit organizations are not directly eligible. However, such entities may be a Co-Applicant in an application. 1. Grant Recipient Name of Grant Recipient: Clackamas County Contact Person: Teresa Christopherson Address: 2051 Kaen Rd., Oregon City, OR 97045 Telephone: 503-650-5718 E-Mail: [email protected] 2. Type of Grant Recipient (check one) Clackamas County X Multnomah County Washington County Government Operated Transit Provider 3. Co-Applicant (if different than Grant Recipient) Name of Co-Applicant: Contact Person: Address: Telephone: E-Mail: Regional Coordination Program Page 1 Regional Coordination Program FY19-21 Application II. Project Details RCP eligible projects must appear in a Local Plan (see STIF Rules OARs 732-042-0015) and intend to improve or expand public transportation or maintain public transportation. 1. Project Details Project Title: Tualatin/West Linn/Oregon City Commuter Shuttle Start Date: January 1, 2019 End Date: Ongoing (application to 6/30/21) 2. Project Purpose (check one) Improve or Expand Public Transportation: X Maintain Public Transportation: 3. Local Plan Plan Name: TriMet Southwest Service Enhancement Plan Governing Body That TriMet Board of Directors Adopted Plan: Plan Adoption Date: December, 2015 Plan Web Address: https://trimet.org/future/ Plan Page Number P. 9, 13 Referencing Project: III. Funding Eligible use of STIF funds for the RCP may include planning, capital, and ongoing operations within the TriMet District.
    [Show full text]
  • TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Adopted April 8Th, 2014 by Ordinance No
    CITY OF TROUTDALE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM PLAN Adopted April 8th, 2014 by Ordinance no. 820 Prepared for: Prepared by: City of Troutdale Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 219 E Historic Columbia River Highway 610 SW Alder, Suite 700 Troutdale, Oregon 97060 Portland, Oregon 97205 503.665.5175 503.228.5230 www.kittelson.com Transportation System Plan Troutdale Transportation System Plan Troutdale, Oregon Prepared For: City of Troutdale 219 E Historic Columbia River Highway Troutdale, Oregon 97060 (503) 665-5175 Prepared By: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. 610 SW Alder, Suite 700 Portland, OR 97205 (503) 228-5230 Project Manager: Matt Hughart, AICP Project Principal: Mark Vandehey, P.E. Project No. 12560.0 March 2014 Table of Contents Transportation System Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 1-1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................................................. 1-1 Goals and Policies ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1-2 Transportation Plans ................................................................................................................................................................ 1-3 Financing ...............................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • WSK Commuter Rail Study
    Oregon Department of Transportation – Rail Division Oregon Rail Study Appendix I Wilsonville to Salem Commuter Rail Assessment Prepared by: Parsons Brinckerhoff Team Parsons Brinckerhoff Simpson Consulting Sorin Garber Consulting Group Tangent Services Wilbur Smith and Associates April 2010 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................... 3 WHAT IS COMMUTER RAIL? ................................................................................................... 3 GLOSSARY OF TERMS............................................................................................................ 3 STUDY AREA....................................................................................................................... 4 WES COMMUTER RAIL.......................................................................................................... 6 OTHER PASSENGER RAIL SERVICES IN THE CORRIDOR .................................................................. 6 OUTREACH WITH RAILROADS: PNWR AND BNSF .................................................................. 7 PORTLAND & WESTERN RAILROAD........................................................................................... 7 BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY ..................................................................................................... 7 ROUTE CHARACTERISTICS..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rediscovering Our Roots
    3rd Quarter 2012 news for members of Unitus Community Credit Union In This Issue 75th Anniversary Student loans that cover the gap Navigating Your Money Stories that Unite Us Manage your money with Total Finance It’s Time to Celebrate! In honor of our 75-year milestone, we are throwing a party at each Unitus branch, featuring giveaways and food! Rediscovering Our Roots Plaza Branch Tuesday, July 24 When the Oregon Telephone Employees Credit Union • Plaza Branch, 12–1:30 PM Busters BBQ + Band: Wild Ones was founded in 1937, its mission was to help individuals Other Branches succeed through the strength of the community. Friday, July 13 The organization, formed during the What has remained the same, though, • Mill Plain Crossing: 11–1 PM Great Depression, continued to help its has been our dedication to the financial Sheridan’s Latte’s & Frozen Custard, members in wartime and peacetime, dur- well-being of our member-owners, return- Ice Cream Sundae Bar ing economic recession and expansion, ing all profits directly to you as we keep Friday, July 20 responding to their needs for stability and our fees low and our service level high. • Peterkort Branch: 11–1 PM stewardship of their finances. We started as a co-op for telephone work- Reedville Catering, Strawberry Shortcake Over the last 75 years, the financial ers—the people who kept communication • Tanasbourne Branch: 11–1 PM world has changed, becoming more com- flowing. Today, we’re still committed to Reedville Catering, Strawberry Shortcake plex than ever, and to help our members, that principle, engaging our members we’ve expanded our products and ser- daily via our newly redesigned website, • Salem Branch: 11–1 PM vices to suit their needs.
    [Show full text]